Yahoo Tuning Groups Ultimate Backup tuning Adaptive Just Intonation in Choral Performance

Hello! I just ran into your archives on the Web and found a lot of fascinating reading. I founded and conduct a choir, the Cantus Angelicus Choral Society (http://www.cangelic.org), where we consciously pose as an ideal for ourselves a kind of adaptive Just Intonation (JI). We use special, mathematically structured warm-up exercises designed to optimize the strength of the natural feedback musicians intuitively respond to when they tune harmonic intervals (i.e., simultaneously sounded musical tones of different pitches).

This practice has enabled amateurs in a rural Iowa town of less than ten thousand, some of whom have had little or no formal musical training and can barely be said to have had the ability to read music when they joined, to sing beautiful just harmonies when given sufficient training and rehearsal time on the piece in question. Interestingly, they seem to enjoy doing Renaissance music more than anything else in our repertoire, and tend to reach a higher quality performance standard than with any other music.

For anyone with any sginificant experience working with this musical phenomenon, it is unarguably demonstrable that the human ear spontaneously tends to settle on a harmonically "sweet" spot, that is, to select pitches that when simultaneously sounded produce sum and difference frequencies that are coherently and simply related to the fundamentals of the sounding pitches. Mathematically it is trivial to show that this only occurs when the fundamental frequencies involved are in simple whole number relationships to each other. The only musically knowledgeable people I have found who will argue strongly against this are academics of highly questionable pedigree when it comes down to practical tuning experience and the simple musicality of their ears.

On the "problems" encountered with just tunings, in vocal music especially, as some of your learned contributors have noted in the context of music in general, these fine points of tuning are much more critical in the context of harmony than in that of melody. I am a string player, and only a week or two after beginning my studies empirically noticed the syntonic comma between a first finger, first position E on the D string a major sixth above the open G and the "same" E a perfect fourth below the open A. The latter is, of course, a syntonic comma higher than the former. The syntonic comma is no small error, only slightly less than a quarter of an equal-tempered semitone. Yet even some of the string players among the tin-eared academics to which I referred earlier never seem to have noticed this!

In the example of the two Es on the violin, psychoacoustically the technically uninvolved listener's ear doesn't seem to notice easily the slight melodic shift between one E and the other in tuning to the G first and shifting up to tune to the A immediately afterwards. Very few among even the most seasoned musicians with very precise and musical hearing will notice such a melodic shift in the context of a piece music.** Since vocalists trained to hear and produce just harmonic intervals are constrained only by their ears and the purity of their harmony, shifting melodically to "fudge" the mistunings that would otherwise occur harmonically in order to avoid pitch drifts, etc. is not a problem and goes undetected by both the performers and their audience. It is done intuitively.

Fortunately, the close coincidence of the beginning and end of the cycle of justly tuned perfect fifths, differing only by the Pythagorean comma of about 24 cents, and the melodically acceptable approximation of equal temperament to just tuning, together allow for a lot of subtle dynamic fudging, eliminating the need for undesirable and clearly detectable tempered compromise in otherwise exquisitely tuned vertical harmonies. Furthermore, this supports the natural tendency of the human ear to want closure and a sense of pitch stability even in music that is chromatically complex and full of lovely and clever harmonic modulations.

So personal experience strongly indicates that the following three factors combine happily, the first two allowing reconciliation with the last, to allow intuitive dynamic adjustments or "adaptive JI" to work as a stunningly beautiful and practical approach to a cappella performance of appropriate music:

1) the psychoacoustically non-critical nature of small melodic pitch shifts of "the same note" in terms of sequential pitches, (i.e., melodic perception)
2) the near coincidence of the first and final pitches of the "cycle" of fifths and the consequent melodically close approximation of equal-temperament to just intervals
3) the human psychological need for a sense of a stable reference pitch and ultimate closure vis-a-vis the same pitch reference from a compositional viewpoint

I cannot imagine, given the historical evidence of wide-spread sensitivity to tuning schemes, the nature and quality of the composition of the times, and the natural tendency of well-trained human ears to gravitate toward it, that this is any other than an authentic performance style for the High Renaissance. It is an added bonus that even when performing music accompanied by equal-tempered instruments, singers trained to sing justly tuned intervals intuitively adapt and sing much better in tune in this context than their counterparts lacking in such training. It seems clear that this is because they have been experientially drenched in the practical application of the first principles behind the comprises that equal temperament implements.

Sincerely yours,

Robert P. Wendell
Founder & Music Director
Cantus Angelicus Choral Society
rwendell@cangelic.org
http://www.cangelic.org

P.S. **The statements made here are NOT intended to denigrate in any way the work of those Just Intonation advocates who use JI to expand compositional possiblities melodically as well as harmonically. I am fascinated by this approach to new composition and eagerly await truly great genius to manifest in this compositional subculture.

🔗Paul Erlich <paul@stretch-music.com>

--- In tuning@y..., rwendell@c... wrote:

>Since vocalists trained to hear and produce just harmonic intervals
>are constrained only by their ears and the purity of their harmony,
>shifting melodically to "fudge" the mistunings that would otherwise
>occur harmonically in order to avoid pitch drifts, etc. is not a
>problem and goes undetected by both the performers and their
>audience. It is done intuitively.

I am very heartened to hear you say this, as I have been arguing for
this very point here, particularly in regard to Renaissance
repertoire!

>
> Fortunately, the close coincidence of the beginning and end of the
>cycle of justly tuned perfect fifths, differing only by the
>Pythagorean comma of about 24 cents, and the melodically acceptable
>approximation of equal temperament to just tuning, together allow
>for a lot of subtle dynamic fudging, eliminating the need for
>undesirable and clearly detectable tempered compromise in otherwise
>exquisitely tuned vertical harmonies. Furthermore, this supports the
>natural tendency of the human ear to want closure and a sense of
>pitch stability even in music that is chromatically complex and full
>of lovely and clever harmonic modulations.

I would say that meantone temperament, rather than 12-tone equal
temperament, functions much better as a "baseline" tuning from which
to acheive adaptive JI, at least for most music from the Renaissance,
Baroque, and Classical periods.
>
> I cannot imagine, given the historical evidence of wide-spread
>sensitivity to tuning schemes, the nature and quality of the
>composition of the times, and the natural tendency of well-trained
>human ears to gravitate toward it, that this is any other than an
>authentic performance style for the High Renaissance.

I'm with you on that!
>
> P.S. **The statements made here are NOT intended to denigrate in
>any way the work of those Just Intonation advocates who use JI to
>expand compositional possiblities melodically as well as
>harmonically. I am fascinated by this approach to new composition
>and eagerly await truly great genius to manifest in this
>compositional subculture.

Have you heard much of Ben Johnston's music?

🔗carl@lumma.org

🔗BobWendell@technet-inc.com

Thank you, Paul and also Carl for your kind and supportive responses.

Paul, on your following comment - (my response continues under)

"I would say that meantone temperament, rather than 12-tone equal
temperament, functions much better as a "baseline" tuning from which
to acheive adaptive JI, at least for most music from the Renaissance,
Baroque, and Classical periods."

I agree. I only intended to indicate that the happy circumstances
that permit the MELODICally acceptable approximation of equal
temperament to JI allow pretty much unlimited successful MELODIC
fudging in the service of maintaining pure vertical harmonies in the
context of pretty much ANY modulation to ANY desirable key.

I agree that the gradually developing melodic memory of ears trained
to favor JI evolves toward intervals closer to meantone than to equal
temperament. This is a carefully considered statement based on a lot
of empirical experience with vocal resources that are relatively
naive musically and understand intellectually next to NOTHING about
JI.

For example, if I hold down a sustained octave drone with a fifth in
the middle (e.g., C-G-C'), somewhat like the tamboura in classical
Indian music, and have the choir sing a major diatonic scale against
it, they will intuitively home in on the unequal whole steps of the
Major second and minor third above the tonic.

They are totally unaware that they are unequal, but just naturally
tune for the most coherent relationship to the drone. I must
emphasize that this is only with a choir that has been TRAINED to
RECOGNIZE intuitively the most coherent relationship or "sweet spot"
between or among the components of harmonically related tones.

If I ask them to sing the minor seventh within the fifth-filled
octave drone, they spontaneously tune to the 7-limit ratio, so the
drone chord 4:6:8 (same as 2:3:4)becomes 4:6:7:8. If I drop the upper
octave and switch the fifth to a fourth (e.g. C-F), they
spontaneously retune to a Perfect fourth above the fourth so the 7-
limit Bb(-) becomes a Bb about 31 cents higher. I use this exercise
deliberately, alternating back and forth, to develop their
sensitivity to finer pitch differences.

Carl, on the mathematically designed tuning exercises I use as part
of the warm-up for the choir, I haven't published these yet, but hope
to find a grant to help develop a choral workshop that will
incorporate this and other unique approaches to choral training. The
only copyright I have on them for the moment is the statement of
copyright on the score. I have no problem in sharing these with any
interested parties who agree not to violate the copyright and to
duplicate only with the statement intact, giving credit where credit
is due.

The exercises are exceedingly simple, and the mechanics of their
power for ear training are quite a trivial matter to comprehend once
revealed, so it could be tempting just to feel that they are public
domain and proceed as if they were one's own. I should add that the
timbre of the synth drone we use is critical, and the vowel used
should be ooo (Italian or Latin u), since this optimizes clear
feedback.

Yours,

Bob

--- In tuning@y..., "Paul Erlich" <paul@s...> wrote:
> --- In tuning@y..., rwendell@c... wrote:
>
> >Since vocalists trained to hear and produce just harmonic
intervals
> >are constrained only by their ears and the purity of their
harmony,
> >shifting melodically to "fudge" the mistunings that would
otherwise
> >occur harmonically in order to avoid pitch drifts, etc. is not a
> >problem and goes undetected by both the performers and their
> >audience. It is done intuitively.
>
> I am very heartened to hear you say this, as I have been arguing
for
> this very point here, particularly in regard to Renaissance
> repertoire!
>
> >
> > Fortunately, the close coincidence of the beginning and end of
the
> >cycle of justly tuned perfect fifths, differing only by the
> >Pythagorean comma of about 24 cents, and the melodically
acceptable
> >approximation of equal temperament to just tuning, together allow
> >for a lot of subtle dynamic fudging, eliminating the need for
> >undesirable and clearly detectable tempered compromise in
otherwise
> >exquisitely tuned vertical harmonies. Furthermore, this supports
the
> >natural tendency of the human ear to want closure and a sense of
> >pitch stability even in music that is chromatically complex and
full
> >of lovely and clever harmonic modulations.
>
> I would say that meantone temperament, rather than 12-tone equal
> temperament, functions much better as a "baseline" tuning from
which
> to acheive adaptive JI, at least for most music from the
Renaissance,
> Baroque, and Classical periods.
> >
> > I cannot imagine, given the historical evidence of wide-spread
> >sensitivity to tuning schemes, the nature and quality of the
> >composition of the times, and the natural tendency of well-trained
> >human ears to gravitate toward it, that this is any other than an
> >authentic performance style for the High Renaissance.
>
> I'm with you on that!
> >
> > P.S. **The statements made here are NOT intended to denigrate in
> >any way the work of those Just Intonation advocates who use JI to
> >expand compositional possiblities melodically as well as
> >harmonically. I am fascinated by this approach to new composition
> >and eagerly await truly great genius to manifest in this
> >compositional subculture.
>
> Have you heard much of Ben Johnston's music?

🔗carl@lumma.org

🔗BobWendell@technet-inc.com

Thanks again, Paul. I didn't respond to your question about the
extent of my exposure to the music of Ben Johnston. You were
responding to my post script:

P.S. **The statements made here are NOT intended to denigrate in
any way the work of those Just Intonation advocates who use JI to
expand compositional possiblities melodically as well as
harmonically. I am fascinated by this approach to new composition
and eagerly await truly great genius to manifest in this
compositional subculture.

I have only heard a few snippets of his music on the Web in the form
of streaming audio, so I would not say that I have had a fair
exposure to his work. If you have any recommendations, I would be
delighted to consider them! Please include a good source for
acquiring this music.

🔗Paul Erlich <paul@stretch-music.com>

--- In tuning@y..., BobWendell@t... wrote:
> Thank you, Paul and also Carl for your kind and supportive
responses.
>
> Paul, on your following comment - (my response continues under)
>
> "I would say that meantone temperament, rather than 12-tone equal
> temperament, functions much better as a "baseline" tuning from
which
> to acheive adaptive JI, at least for most music from the
Renaissance,
> Baroque, and Classical periods."
>
> I agree. I only intended to indicate that the happy circumstances
> that permit the MELODICally acceptable approximation of equal
> temperament to JI allow pretty much unlimited successful MELODIC
> fudging in the service of maintaining pure vertical harmonies in
the
> context of pretty much ANY modulation to ANY desirable key.

Yes -- this is particularly important for music since, say, Beethoven.
>
> I agree that the gradually developing melodic memory of ears
trained
> to favor JI evolves toward intervals closer to meantone than to
equal
> temperament.

I had a really hard time explaining this point to Johnny Reinhard
when this subject last came up. I'm glad someone else knows what I'm
talking about. Of course, it wouldn't be the case if typical chord
progressions moved by consecutive major thirds or minor thirds,
relying on the ability of the octave to be divided into three or four
equal parts, respectively. But since most chord progressions are
diatonic, meantone intervals become the melodic "norm".

> This is a carefully considered statement based on a lot
> of empirical experience with vocal resources that are relatively
> naive musically and understand intellectually next to NOTHING about
> JI.

!!! very important !!! -- it's natural to sing this way -- it's not a
matter of intellectual contortions while you're singing!

🔗Paul Erlich <paul@stretch-music.com>

🔗John Starrett <jstarret@carbon.cudenver.edu>

🔗jpehrson@rcn.com

--- In tuning@y..., "John Starrett" <jstarret@c...> wrote:

/tuning/topicId_26638.html#26730

> --- In tuning@y..., BobWendell@t... wrote:
> > Thanks again, Paul. I didn't respond to your question about the
> > extent of my exposure to the music of Ben Johnston. You were
> > responding to my post script:
>
> Hi Bob. I recently recieved the newly remastered Ben Johnston
string quartets, and realized it was these that got me into
microtonality. I think I bought the album with John Cage's hrpschrd
and a couple of Ben Johnston string quartets (Nonesuch) right out of
high school. I never listen to the Cage, but I wore out the Ben
Johnston grooves. About that same time I bought a Harry Partch album
in *quadraphonic* sound (remember that?). There is no turning back .
I recommend the new remastered CD highly.
>
> John Starrett

Absolutely!

In fact, here's a little "game..."

What's *your* order of preference. Mine is listed below, but I
reserve the right to change it entirely as I listen more! From my
favorite at the top:

5
2
9
6
3
4
1

__________ ___________ ___________
Joseph Pehrson

🔗Paul Erlich <paul@stretch-music.com>

🔗BobWendell@technet-inc.com

Bob Wendell:
This is a carefully considered statement based on a lot
of empirical experience with vocal resources that are relatively
naive musically and understand intellectually next to NOTHING about >
JI.

Paul Erlich:
!!! very important !!! -- it's natural to sing this way -- it's not a
matter of intellectual contortions while you're singing!

Bob's reply to Paul:
Precisely, my good friend. Thank you! I think the modern ignorance
of WAY TOO MANY MUSICIANS concerning the subtle problems of melodic
pitch nuances musicians encountered DAILY before tuning was relegated
to professional specialists is responsible for a lot of garbage!
There is a reluctance to expose this ignorance and instead just say
equal temperament is fine and anyone who thinks otherwise is an
impractical fanatic, some kind of radical who wants to upset our
comfortable, ignorant little applecart!

The problem is that this cultivates a culture of insensitivity to the
first principles of harmony and pitch. This promotes a degree of
HABITUAL PITCH ERROR DURING PERFORMANCE, and MOST ESPECIALLY during
choral performance, that makes even the compromises of well-tuned
equal temperament LOOK GOOD by contrast.

This culture is often so arrogant as to assume a linear evolution
that to them implies that the older "primitive" instruments imposed
even worse performance standards with respect to pitch than is common
today! Fortunately, the revival of interest in early music has
finally spawned a generation of original instrument players who give
the lie to this idea, not to mention that such arrogance flies
completely in the face of objectively considered historical evidence.

Further, too many singers spend years training their voices only to
become prima donnas in amazingly high places (who puts them there?)
and impose severe pitch problems on their listeners and instrumental
accompanists in blithely blissful, arrogant ignorance of their
pitifully unmusical renditions. Some of them attempt to hide
it with such wildly wide vibratos the the point becomes moot, but
this is exceedingly ugly in itself, and is even a musical blight
purely from the standpoint of good vocal technique. The much-revered
Met is unfortunatley not at all exempt!

🔗monz <joemonz@yahoo.com>

> From: <BobWendell@technet-inc.com>
> To: <tuning@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Monday, August 06, 2001 4:32 PM
> Subject: [tuning] Re: Adaptive Just Intonation in Choral Performance
>
>
> This culture is often so arrogant as to assume a linear evolution
> that to them implies that the older "primitive" instruments imposed
> even worse performance standards with respect to pitch than is common
> today! Fortunately, the revival of interest in early music has
> finally spawned a generation of original instrument players who give
> the lie to this idea, not to mention that such arrogance flies
> completely in the face of objectively considered historical evidence.

Hi Bob,

Your point is very well taken, but please note emphatically that
many (or probably most) subscribers here do not have these beliefs.
We know better.

> Further, too many singers spend years training their voices only to
> become prima donnas in amazingly high places (who puts them there?)
> and impose severe pitch problems on their listeners and instrumental
> accompanists in blithely blissful, arrogant ignorance of their
> pitifully unmusical renditions. Some of them attempt to hide
> it with such wildly wide vibratos the the point becomes moot, but
> this is exceedingly ugly in itself, and is even a musical blight
> purely from the standpoint of good vocal technique. The much-revered
> Met is unfortunatley not at all exempt!

YES, YES, YES! As I've written here many times before, I am in
*TOTAL* agreement with what you say here!!!

love / peace / harmony ...

-monz
http://www.monz.org
"All roads lead to n^0"

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

🔗John Starrett <jstarret@carbon.cudenver.edu>

🔗monz <joemonz@yahoo.com>

🔗Jay Williams <jaywill@tscnet.com>

🔗BobWendell@technet-inc.com

Your point is very well taken, but please note emphatically that
> many (or probably most) subscribers here do not have these beliefs.
> We know better.

Yes, thanks, Joe. Not trying to preach to the choir. I assumed not.
Just getting it off my chest, I guess. Out here in the world around
me in the midwest there are plenty of heads in the sand.

--- In tuning@y..., "monz" <joemonz@y...> wrote:
> > From: <BobWendell@t...>
> > To: <tuning@y...>
> > Sent: Monday, August 06, 2001 4:32 PM
> > Subject: [tuning] Re: Adaptive Just Intonation in Choral
Performance
> >
> >
> > This culture is often so arrogant as to assume a linear evolution
> > that to them implies that the older "primitive" instruments
imposed
> > even worse performance standards with respect to pitch than is
common
> > today! Fortunately, the revival of interest in early music has
> > finally spawned a generation of original instrument players who
give
> > the lie to this idea, not to mention that such arrogance flies
> > completely in the face of objectively considered historical
evidence.
>
>
> Hi Bob,
>
>
> Your point is very well taken, but please note emphatically that
> many (or probably most) subscribers here do not have these beliefs.
> We know better.
>
>
> > Further, too many singers spend years training their voices only
to
> > become prima donnas in amazingly high places (who puts them
there?)
> > and impose severe pitch problems on their listeners and
instrumental
> > accompanists in blithely blissful, arrogant ignorance of their
> > pitifully unmusical renditions. Some of them attempt to hide
> > it with such wildly wide vibratos the the point becomes moot, but
> > this is exceedingly ugly in itself, and is even a musical blight
> > purely from the standpoint of good vocal technique. The much-
revered
> > Met is unfortunatley not at all exempt!
>
>
> YES, YES, YES! As I've written here many times before, I am in
> *TOTAL* agreement with what you say here!!!
>
>
> love / peace / harmony ...
>
> -monz
> http://www.monz.org
> "All roads lead to n^0"
>
>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

🔗BobWendell@technet-inc.com

Hi, Jay and also John Starret! Thanks for your contributions to this
thread. I'm not an extremest about vibrato. I believe it is a natural
consequence of good vocal technique. But a healthy vibrato involves
very modest pitch modulation, largely consisting instead of a
moderate fluctuation in volume and timbre. In my book, this kind of
healthy, natural vibrato is totally compatible with the adaptive JI
to which I referred in the discussion on Renaissance music.

However, I also believe that there are times when an almost ram-rod
straight tone is "de rigeur", especially when very subtle shifts in
pitch mandate it for the reasons of perceptual clarity to which you
both refer. Note that even in much Indian classical performance of
ragas, there is often vibrato present, but it is quite moderate, and
completely disappears in the context of subtle microtonal inflections.

--- In tuning@y..., Jay Williams <jaywill@t...> wrote:
> At 04:06 AM 8/7/01 -0000, you wrote:
> >> > Further, too many singers spend years training their voices
only
> >>> to
> >> > become prima donnas in amazingly high places (who puts them
> >there?)
> >> > and impose severe pitch problems on their listeners and
> >instrumental
> >> > accompanists in blithely blissful, arrogant ignorance of their
> >> > pitifully unmusical renditions. Some of them attempt to hide
> >> > it with such wildly wide vibratos the point becomes moot, but
> >> > this is exceedingly ugly in itself, and is even a musical
blight
> >> > purely from the standpoint of good vocal technique.
> Along that line, 30 years ago John Eaton played a tape for a few of
us of a
> performance of his opera, "Myshkin" which, as do many of his works,
has a
> fair amount of quarter-tone writing. Same damn problem. The
soprano's
> vibrato extended consistently over a major second and when things
got
> really dicey, to a minor third. I kept silent til he insisted on our
> reactions. When I mildly pointed out that the width of the vibrato
far
> exceeded my ability to distinguish semitones, let along
quartertones, he
> went balistic, or maybe, bombastic. Such was his reference for the
> soprano's technique. I dunno. I jiss don't get it.

🔗JoJoBuBu@aol.com

> I have only heard a few snippets of his music on the Web in the
form
> of streaming audio, so I would not say that I have had a fair
> exposure to his work. If you have any recommendations, I would be
> delighted to consider them! Please include a good source for
> acquiring this music.

>Our friend Andy Stefik here recently remastered Ben >Johnston's String
>Quartets 1-6 and 9, and he provided us with Ben's e->mail address for
>ordering the 2-CD set. Many of did that, and were very >impressed by
>the music (which covers several radically different >styles in
>Johnston's career). Perhaps Andy can refresh you on >the info or you
>can look through the archives and find it yourself.

I'm on my cross country trip at the moment but happen to have access to a computer as I'm staying at a friends house in New Mexico. Feel free to contact Ben directly about the CD. benbetjo@aol.com.

A very minor correction is that all of the quartets mentioned were remastered except for the ninth. The ninth was recorded digitally already and didn't require remastering. All of the others were remastered though just as you said. 1-6 came form original tapes and 9 was ripped from a CD.

Bob, feel free to ask Ben about getting his publisher info. I would give it here, but I dont remember the address of his publisher off the top of my head, but Ben will know of course. His publisher should have any scores you would need as well.

As for commercial recordings of his music, since you asked, there is a different version of the 4th quartet on the Kronos album "white man sleeps." Ben has another album called "Ponder Nothing." Both of these were available on Amazon.com last I checked.

Last but not least if you still cant find everything you want he has an archive somewhere in illinois. Its not in Urbana/champaign where he taught. I think it is in chicago. Anyway Ben can fill you in on the nitty gritty details of that if you want.

That would be enough info I think. Oh and Paul thanks for the kind words about the CD I appreciate it.

Later,
Andy

🔗jpehrson@rcn.com

--- In tuning@y..., "monz" <joemonz@y...> wrote:

/tuning/topicId_26638.html#26754

>
> > From: John Starrett <jstarret@c...>
> > To: <tuning@y...>
> > Sent: Monday, August 06, 2001 9:06 PM
> > Subject: [tuning] Re: Adaptive Just Intonation in Choral
Performance
> >
> >
> > I was listening to a story on NPR about the staging of one of
Wagner's
> > operas, and it was a wonderful and interesting radio piece until
they
> > played some of the music. The Wagner was beautiful, but the
singing
> > was word class HORRIBLE. The vibrato was so heavy that I had to
> > concentrate to hear the pitch, and it was off key whan I was
finally
> > able to distinguish it. The sad part is that many opera lovers
like
> > this vocal abomination.
> >
> > Thank you, Bob.
> >
> > John Starrett
>
>
> Well, with 3 of us in agreement, it looks like it's time to create
> the non-vibrato-tuning list!
>

A lot of people seem to feel that vibrato is anathema to alternate
tuning, or *correct* tuning of *any* kind. That's why I was so happy
that my violist in Russia, Vera Gubenkova, went out of her way *not*
to use vibrato... more than in standard technique.

Brian McLaren seems to disagree on this opinion of the value of
vibrato in alternate tuning, but I suppose that discussion should be
on the "Brian McLaren Tuning List..." (CrazyMusic)

____________ __________ _________
Joseph Pehrson

🔗jpehrson@rcn.com

--- In tuning@y..., Jay Williams <jaywill@t...> wrote:

/tuning/topicId_26638.html#26763

> At 04:06 AM 8/7/01 -0000, you wrote:
> >> > Further, too many singers spend years training their voices
only
> >>> to
> >> > become prima donnas in amazingly high places (who puts them
> >there?)
> >> > and impose severe pitch problems on their listeners and
> >instrumental
> >> > accompanists in blithely blissful, arrogant ignorance of their
> >> > pitifully unmusical renditions. Some of them attempt to hide
> >> > it with such wildly wide vibratos the point becomes moot, but
> >> > this is exceedingly ugly in itself, and is even a musical
blight
> >> > purely from the standpoint of good vocal technique.
> Along that line, 30 years ago John Eaton played a tape for a few of
us of a
> performance of his opera, "Myshkin" which, as do many of his works,
has a
> fair amount of quarter-tone writing. Same damn problem. The
soprano's
> vibrato extended consistently over a major second and when things
got
> really dicey, to a minor third. I kept silent til he insisted on our
> reactions. When I mildly pointed out that the width of the vibrato
far
> exceeded my ability to distinguish semitones, let along
quartertones, he
> went balistic, or maybe, bombastic. Such was his reference for the
> soprano's technique. I dunno. I jiss don't get it.

Maybe it's simpler than that, Jay... Maybe the soprano was a
sizable "box office draw" and Eaton was "flattered" she was singing
his music.

In that case, it became "flattENed" rather than "flattERed..."

________ ________ _______
Joseph Pehrson

🔗jpehrson@rcn.com

🔗Herman Miller <hmiller@IO.COM>

🔗John Starrett <jstarret@carbon.cudenver.edu>

🔗jpehrson@rcn.com

🔗BobWendell@technet-inc.com

Hi, Joseph! In response to the following:

Brian McLaren seems to disagree on this opinion of the value of
vibrato in alternate tuning, but I suppose that discussion should be
on the "Brian McLaren Tuning List..." (CrazyMusic)

____________ __________ _________
Joseph Pehrson

Rather than a long back and forth, I'll just share my thoughts on
the vibrato issue for those interested readers who might come along.

As I implied earlier in this thread, I don't take what I consider
the extreme position of no vibrato at all. It is a natural component
of bel canto (the definition of which is much debated and would
require another long discussion, but my understanding of which I do
hold as an ideal approach to vocal technique). There is probably AT
LEAST as much ignorance and distortion concerning bel canto practice
in the mainstream world of vocal music today as there is concerning
tuning and stylistic authenticity in early music.

In my book, SOME vibrato in singing is a natural feature of ideal,
musically expressive technique and not a mechanical artifice
superimposed solely for arbitrary aesthetic reasons. Indeed, some
effort would be required to remove it. Admittedly, the wobbling of
the hand and/or fingers in string playing is a mechanical artifice
arising from the desire to make the instrument "sing" in
imitation of the human voice. This can be exaggerated, of course, as
easily as the technical infirmity known as a "wobble" in some
of the
singing to which we have referred earlier.

Nonetheless, to perpetually maintain ram-rod straight tones can be
dangerous. It can lead to rigidity, destroying natural vocal ease and
freedom. Even in Indian singers of classical ragas there is often
some vibrato, but it disappears in the execution of the microtonal
inflections common in that music.

Interestingly, the technique typically used in the shorter, faster
moving microtonal inflections is closely akin to the natural vibrato
of what I consider to be true bel canto. This doesn't contradict
the
earlier statement that vocal vibrato is not simply some kind of
arbitrary mechanical artifice. The virtuoso technique I hear in the
best Indian singers for these inflections is something like a natural
vibrato coordinated within very precise rhythmic and pitch
parameters. Good technique always swims along the currents that
nature provides, riding them to maximum advantage for a minimum of
effort.

If you listen to the MP3 at our site (http://www.cangelic.org) of Di
Lasso's Adoramus Te Christe, you will hear a lot of straight
tones,
especially at soft dynamic levels. However, a close listening will
reveal that vibrato is often there, too, but never in such a way as
to interfere with the purity of the vertical harmonies.

I do NOT claim to have a choir full of good bel canto singers! Far
from it! But as I mentioned earlier, the pitch modulation in a good
bel canto singer with a truly natural vibrato is slight and does NOT
interfere with the perception of a clear and precise pitch center!
The major components of such a vibrato are modulations in vibrational
amplitude and richness of timbre and only very slight modulation of
pitch!

By the way, although the example cited is quite pure harmonically, we
do not claim to always and consistently achieve our ideal of adaptive
JI. The available vocal resources in a rural Iowa town of less than
10,000 population with new singers coming in without
ever having had our training put such long-term consistency beyond
our reach.

Flatness of pitch came up earlier in this thread. I have had to deal
with this frequently, and it is often a result of wide pitch
modulation (a "no-no" in my book) in which the singer focuses
attention on the TOP of the pitch excursions and therefore perceives
it as if it were the pitch center, while the listeners naturally
perceive the pitch as in the center of the pitch modulations. This
is one of the most subtle and difficult pitch problems to cure, and
worse, often involves painstakingly working through a lot of ego
investment on the part of the singer!

Thanks again for your input, everyone! These discussions are very
helpful to me in crystallizing my thinking.

- Bob Wendell
http://www.cangelic.org
rwendell@cangelic.org

> > > John Starrett

> >
> > Well, with 3 of us in agreement, it looks like it's time to create
> > the non-vibrato-tuning list!
> >
>
> A lot of people seem to feel that vibrato is anathema to alternate
> tuning, or *correct* tuning of *any* kind. That's why I was so
happy
> that my violist in Russia, Vera Gubenkova, went out of her way
*not*
> to use vibrato... more than in standard technique.
>
> Brian McLaren seems to disagree on this opinion of the value of
> vibrato in alternate tuning, but I suppose that discussion should
be
> on the "Brian McLaren Tuning List..." (CrazyMusic)
>
> ____________ __________ _________
> Joseph Pehrson

🔗BobWendell@technet-inc.com

Yes, I've heard many so-called wonderful singers sound worse than
porcupine quills must feel (although I've never personally
experienced the latter in order to make a scientfically valid
comparison. John Starrett does a great job, though, of relating these
phenomena scientifically using an admittedly somewhat esoteric form
of higher mathematical argument later on in this thread......LOL!!!).

- Bob

--- In tuning@y..., Herman Miller <hmiller@I...> wrote:
> On Tue, 07 Aug 2001 04:06:07 -0000, "John Starrett"
> <jstarret@c...> wrote:
>
> >I was listening to a story on NPR about the staging of one of
Wagner's
> >operas, and it was a wonderful and interesting radio piece until
they
> >played some of the music. The Wagner was beautiful, but the
singing
> >was word class HORRIBLE. The vibrato was so heavy that I had to
> >concentrate to hear the pitch, and it was off key whan I was
finally
> >able to distinguish it. The sad part is that many opera lovers
like
> >this vocal abomination.
>
> As I used to say when I heard that kind of opera singing on the
radio, "A
> porcupine could sing better than that!" (Origin of the idea for
"Mizarian
> Porcupine Opera". But I don't remember how 15-TET came to be
associated
> with Porcupine music.)

🔗Alison Monteith <alison.monteith3@which.net>

BobWendell@technet-inc.com wrote:

> Carl, on the mathematically designed tuning exercises I use as part
> of the warm-up for the choir, I haven't published these yet, but hope
> to find a grant to help develop a choral workshop that will
> incorporate this and other unique approaches to choral training. The
> only copyright I have on them for the moment is the statement of
> copyright on the score. I have no problem in sharing these with any
> interested parties who agree not to violate the copyright and to
> duplicate only with the statement intact, giving credit where credit
> is due.
>
> The exercises are exceedingly simple, and the mechanics of their
> power for ear training are quite a trivial matter to comprehend once
> revealed, so it could be tempting just to feel that they are public
> domain and proceed as if they were one's own. I should add that the
> timbre of the synth drone we use is critical, and the vowel used
> should be ooo (Italian or Latin u), since this optimizes clear
> feedback.
>
> Yours,
>
> Bob

Hello Bob

I've been following your posts eagerly and am especially interested in your choral exercises. I
compose for and conduct a small church choir and have been asked to set up a town choir. I'm
always on the look out for training materials and to see something from the microtonal community
is quite a blessing. I'd be interested in a glimpse at some of your work, or all of it,
acknowledging copyright etc. and giving credit where due as you mention. I have this fanciful
idea of training a choir to sing all over the microtonal spectrum without telling them. Well
eventually somebody would notice : - )

Best wishes.

🔗BobWendell@technet-inc.com

To both Alison and Carl:

Thank you, Alison, for your kind words. I will be happy to oblige,
but I have not had time to finish moving these exercises from my
chicken-scratch manuscript into my nice music software plus write the
instructions for using them. I've never had any need for that, so
they don't exist yet, but they are essential for anyone who wants to
make use of the manuscripts.

I'm not putting you off, but I'm not sure how soon I can get that
done, since I have a lot of more urgent business to take care of.
Please don't hesitate to jerk my string if too much time passes with
no response from me in that regard.

Sincerely,

Bob

--- In tuning@y..., Alison Monteith <alison.monteith3@w...> wrote:
>
>
> BobWendell@t... wrote:
>
> > Carl, on the mathematically designed tuning exercises I use as
part
> > of the warm-up for the choir, I haven't published these yet, but
hope
> > to find a grant to help develop a choral workshop that will
> > incorporate this and other unique approaches to choral training.
The
> > only copyright I have on them for the moment is the statement of
> > copyright on the score. I have no problem in sharing these with
any
> > interested parties who agree not to violate the copyright and to
> > duplicate only with the statement intact, giving credit where
credit
> > is due.
> >
> > The exercises are exceedingly simple, and the mechanics of their
> > power for ear training are quite a trivial matter to comprehend
once
> > revealed, so it could be tempting just to feel that they are
public
> > domain and proceed as if they were one's own. I should add that
the
> > timbre of the synth drone we use is critical, and the vowel used
> > should be ooo (Italian or Latin u), since this optimizes clear
> > feedback.
> >
> > Yours,
> >
> > Bob
>
> Hello Bob
>
> I've been following your posts eagerly and am especially interested
in your choral exercises. I
> compose for and conduct a small church choir and have been asked to
set up a town choir. I'm
> always on the look out for training materials and to see something
from the microtonal community
> is quite a blessing. I'd be interested in a glimpse at some of
your work, or all of it,
> acknowledging copyright etc. and giving credit where due as you
mention. I have this fanciful
> idea of training a choir to sing all over the microtonal spectrum
without telling them. Well
> eventually somebody would notice : - )
>
> Best wishes.

Adaptive Just Intonation in Choral Performance

🔗rwendell@cangelic.org

🔗Paul Erlich <paul@stretch-music.com>

🔗carl@lumma.org

🔗BobWendell@technet-inc.com

🔗carl@lumma.org

🔗BobWendell@technet-inc.com

🔗Paul Erlich <paul@stretch-music.com>

🔗Paul Erlich <paul@stretch-music.com>

🔗John Starrett <jstarret@carbon.cudenver.edu>

🔗John Starrett <jstarret@carbon.cudenver.edu>

🔗jpehrson@rcn.com

🔗Paul Erlich <paul@stretch-music.com>

🔗BobWendell@technet-inc.com

🔗monz <joemonz@yahoo.com>

🔗John Starrett <jstarret@carbon.cudenver.edu>

🔗monz <joemonz@yahoo.com>

🔗Jay Williams <jaywill@tscnet.com>

🔗BobWendell@technet-inc.com

🔗BobWendell@technet-inc.com

🔗JoJoBuBu@aol.com

🔗jpehrson@rcn.com

🔗jpehrson@rcn.com

🔗jpehrson@rcn.com

🔗Herman Miller <hmiller@IO.COM>

🔗John Starrett <jstarret@carbon.cudenver.edu>

🔗jpehrson@rcn.com

🔗BobWendell@technet-inc.com

🔗BobWendell@technet-inc.com

🔗Alison Monteith <alison.monteith3@which.net>

🔗BobWendell@technet-inc.com